Germany does it

...

germany was never happy with it, never allow it to work. something about land access to the middle east.
don't think they gave up that idea just yet

...

Because Balkanians are proud people.

>because balkanians are subhuman apes
FTFY

I can believe that the differences amongst italians and germans could have been comparable to the differences between southern slavs, but you fail to consider that both Italy and Germany as concepts have existed for millennia, whereas Yugoslavia is a 17th century concept with no real history behind it, unlike Roman Italy and HRE Germany.
France and Spain were done unifying before nationalism, so it doesn't really count. Czechoslovakia pretty clearly failed, since it doesn't exist anymore you dumbass.

>communists
You mean nationalists.

It would be easier if they all had the same religion, I guess.

germany and the u.s. paid nationalists to chimp out

Yugo didn't see themselves as a solid ethnic group as the others above did.

They would've if you just allowed them to ethnically cleanse themselves of muslim dirt

>3 different religions instead of 1 or 2
>One is not christian
>Slovenes and Croats are decent people (maybe because of the long german rulership?)
>the others are not
>southeastern europe is in general a shitty place

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyricum_(Roman_province)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrians

>south slavs
>illyrians
Top fucking kek.

Imagine being Slovenia and Croatia. Not only did you spend and contribute to the austrian empire since the days of HRE but you had your place and were acknowledged. Imagine being a part of that cultural circle for so long. Then through the bullshit of unfolding history you end up in a chimera country you share with your retarded, agressive brother with delusions of grandeur and a schizophrenic clusterfuck of shit and Allah that is Bosnia. And then add communism.

It was never a country. It was an insane asylum.

but Czechoslovakia doesn't exist now

No, we don't

t. Lombard

So what the heck did they speak then? Latin?

Other dialects. Regional dialects in Italy are still a thing

Scicily spoke a lot of greek since the theme of Scicily only disappeared in the late 10th century.

>implying literally anyone supported the split

Germans were unified by Prussians, Spaniards by Castillians, France was unified by Franks, Italy was unified by Sardinia, and Yugoslavia was supposed to be unified by Serbs, but Serbs are literally a shit tier people, basically on the same level as gypsies, they were too stupid and incapable to do that and instead even lost the war against albanian farmers from Kosovo.

Like Germany?

>Italy was unified by Sardinia
Kek. True, strictly speaking, but very disingenuous.

Germany used to be incredibly diverse, dialect-wise. Frisian and Low German are closer related to English than to High German.

...

its not about ethnic differences, its about cultural differences, the Croats and Slovenes are catholics who were under Hapsburg rule, Croatia was its own kingdom technically, they had their own regiments and their own traditions and old and important nobility. The Serbs are orthodox, they were a part of a clusteruck muslim empire and the Croats and Slovenes didn't like being ruled by a bunch of Serbs. Even the other Serbs didn't want to be a part of Serbia, the Montenegrins are Serbs but are fiercely independent and proud, they were technically independent and fought against the Ottomans non-stop, whilst Belgrade was its own Pashaluk. The Serbian muslims didn't want to leave their muslim privelidges and the Macedonians hated the Serbs because of the armed Serbian propaganda, their hostile relation to Bulgaria and their collaboration with the Ottoman authorities against the local IMRO bands. Tito and the communists enforced unity with force and a good economy, the people of Yugoslavia were tired of war and the great powers supported neutral Yugoslavia, once a generation or two passed, the war was forgotten, the cold war was over and nobody cared about Yugoslavia, we were left to our own devices, and we did what we have been doing for centuries, we killed each other.

Yugoslavia is the odd one out in the bunch, all those were unified by a regional power of a larger nation, whilst the Serbs tried unifying other nations.

>Why was Yugoslavia a failure
Because during World War 2 the Croats tried to genocide the Serbs and the Serbs responded by killing Croats, so imagine now that these two people have to live together.
>Germany
>One language system

>2 sicilies and Northern Italy, fucking Sardinia
>shared conciousness
No

Occitan will rise again!
Instead of that disgusting eternal cock-in-my-mouth langues d'oui

>while the Balkans has always been a shit show since the Sclavini raped and pillaged their way into the area in the 6th century
Actually, the Yugo-Balkans were shit since before the Slavs came. The region was included into the Roman Republic relatively early on yet it always remained one of the least developed and poorest provinces. It was a land of pirates and hill savages.

NOBODY WANTED THAT SHITHOLE TO EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE

t. butthurt magyar
Marš zpátky za Dunaj

Germans and Italians didn't have to deal with three languages, four religions, five nationalities and two alphabets.

>you will never be born in the country of your fathers and forefathers
>you will never grow up in your family's land
>you will never grow up with your cousins and uncles and other family
>you will never live in the utopian yugoslavia

being diaspora is sometimes pretty shit

>Why Slavs just don't unite they all the same lmao check other historical examples of people who united while they had MUCH more in common haha

>bavarian, saxon, latin, french, dutch/flimflamflemish, polish, czech, italian
>enough religious difference to start the worst religious conflict in european history
>every fucking microstate in the HRE was its own nationality
>I'll give you #4, that one is true.

>three languages

They're completely mutually intelligible with each other, they're dialects at best, the linguistic situation was far more diverse in germany and especially Italy, where like only 2 % of the population was capable of speaking state mandated "standard" italian.

I think he's talking about Slovenian, Serbocroatian and MAcedonian

It's just the balkans, destroying coalitions and subdividing themselves to the point of irrelevance is just something they do.

The two alphabets have 1:1 corespondance to one another. It's more like having a different font.

desu while the differences between german dialects can be pretty big, they're rarely so great that you can't understand each other at all
also who the fuck spoke latin as everyday language in the hre???

The Romans of course

>post a pic after romanians, serbs and communist already occupied hungary

Anyway, czehslovakia was artifically made. Lot of slovakians didn't want to join the czehs, but besides that, South-slovakia had no other ethnicity but Hungarians and Germans.
Pozsony was 10% Slovakian, and 40-50 for Hungarians and Germans. Calling it Bratislava and to make it into a pure slavic city is just one of the dozen crimes the czehslovak nation have commited.

I have nothing against slovakian-czeh unity, but if they could choose where to belong, this should apply to the Hungarians and Russins too.

>bavarian, saxon, latin, french, dutch/flimflamflemish, polish, czech, italian
That's HRE, not Germany. HRE lost Dutch and Italian territories a long time before unification, Austria isn't Germany nor HRE at the moment of unification so no Czechs in Germany either. Germans united and their state included Bavarians, Saxons and so on because they were German peoples, Poles remained second class citizens at best, they had nothing to do with unification being busy being slaves.

>enough religious difference to start the worst religious conflict in european history
Thirty years war was mostly political, and Germans didn't held grudge for what happened - Catholics killed Protestants, Protestants killed Catholics, they reconciled and there was no real religious war after. Also excluding obvious foreign interventions, TYW was waged between people speaking German dialects in "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation".

>every fucking microstate in the HRE was its own nationality
They weren't. You see, Athenians are citizens of Athens, Spartans are citizens of Sparta, but both are Hellenes, and see themselves as "one people" even though they hate each other for political reasons.

On the other side, southern Slavs NEVER united under one state, commited genocides on each other just 20 years ago and had different religions since... forever.
Another thing is, unifications happen under political and nationalist pressure. If Prussia was to keep up with other Great Powers it had to unify with more or less willing German states. Italian peoples had enough of Austrian influence. Balkans had... Serbia and Montenegro. All the other Slavic nationalities were under Austrian and Turkish boot, there's no way they could've united without getting butchered by armies of their oppressors.
I have a very strong suspicion you don't know anything about Balkans at all and try to enforce le Slavs aren't different meme.

Because there's three types of south slavs. Croats, Serbs and Bulgars. They've been seperate states and peoples since the middle ages.
Ottoman Empire was a clusterfuck that fucked up everything, because during its decline awful borders were drawn up that caused pretty much all problems.

Croats, Serbs, Bulgarians, Slovenes, Bosnians, Montenegrins and Macedonians. And they're ethnicities, not "types".

T H I S

too hard for westerners to understand

lmao "ok"

The difference is that when Germany united, cultural identity was being superseded by national identity. Balkans could never into national identity because they're fucking idiot slavic manchildren that care more about what your cuisine is than the fact you're ethnically the same people.

>who the fuck spoke latin as everyday language in the hre???
Not HRE, but Latin was a big deal in Croatia, especially since during Austria-Hungary it was illegal to teach Croatian in schools or to use it in public offices and similar. It was used as a buffer against Magyarisation and Germanisation.

>they're fucking idiot slavic...
Post discarded.

As someone already said nations usually get formed by the dominant regional power, and in yugoslavia's case that would be serbs, who make up around 50% of yugoslavs and inhabit an even bigger part of the territory. The main reason Serbs failed to become the regional hegemon/unite yugoslavia is because they are bad at both warfare and diplomacy/politics, so they weren't able to unify yugoslavia by neither. The people that actually unified yugoslavia for a while were the Croats, and they mainly did this by dominating Serbia politically. When the Serbs wanted to free themselves of this domination in the 1980s. Croats and the others left, and again, Serbs were beaten militarily and politically by the others.

>serbs[...], who make up around 50% of yugoslavs and inhabit an even bigger part of the territory.
Its good to see you be wrong on both. In 1918 Yugoslavia was ~38% Serbian.

>The people that actually unified yugoslavia for a while were the Croats
Kek

the first government was literally re-branded communist party

>Its good to see you be wrong on both. In 1918 Yugoslavia was ~38% Serbian.

There are also non-yugoslavian peoples that lived there (albanians, turks, hungarians, germans, etc.). Within the yugoslav peoples (Slovenians, Macedonians, Montenegrians, Croats, and Bosniaks) Serbs make up around half of the population. The state of Serbia also made up around half of the population and territory.

>Kek

Croats literally invented the idea of Illyria, that later became the idea of yugoslavia, and Tito basically created yugoslavia in a way it suited Croatia. Also, when the Croats didn't feel like it anymore Yugoslavia broke apart. So yes, Serbia basically was defeated by Croatia.

WE

>four religions
Catholic, Orthodox, Muslim and...?

>Illyria
The Illyrian movement's goal may have unity of South Slavs living inside the Habsburg monarchy but the primary goal was the promotion of the Croatian national identity. Because of this, the idea did not receive much Slovene and Serbian support. It played no role in the formation of Yugoslavia after WWI.

Perhaps he counted the several thousand protestants in Slovenia.

Yugoslavia was a Croatian idea, since the beginning. As was the shit called Panslavism.

Serbs never wanted to be in a clusterfuck nation, they always wanted to join their people in one nation (same as the Germans with their shit).

Croatia begged Serbs sucking their cock to take them under their protection because after WW1 there would be no Croatia anymore. Part would go to Italy, a part to Hungary, a part to Austria and the rest to Serbia. (Ante Trumbic the Croatian representative did the cock sucking)

Muslims were never a big deal until America started supporting jihadi exports from Saudi Arabia in the 70's into communist countries, to topple the governments. The durka kebabs in Bosnia and Albos in south Serbia got a grip of the saudi dollar and started killing police officers, because they saw Croats doing the same and the West tolerating it (hell even supporting it).

>Serbs make up around half of the population
Why do you keep saying this even though you know you're wrong?
>The state of Serbia also made up around half of the population and territory.
But, again, you're wrong.

The Serbs did not have a majority in either population or territory. They only had a plurality.

>Croats literally invented the idea of Illyria,
The Illyrian provinces were formed by Napoleon, encompassed lands from modern day Carinthia to Dalmatia with the capital being in Laibach (Ljubljana). Ironically it was a multi ethnic state with several official languages including German and French. The Illyrian kingdom was also a short lived Austrian crown land afterwards albeit in a reduced geographic area.

The Croats were the only ones autistic about it and started reviving it in the 19th century. The entire movement was mostly localized to Croatia but did gain some support in Serbia and Slovenia. It's not what Yugoslavia was based on.

>and Tito basically created yugoslavia in a way it suited Croatia.
I don't even know what to say to this? Did he? Why was Bosnia, or at least a large part of it, not a part of Croatia? I'm pretty sure that even the Banovina formed after WW1 inside Yugoslavia was larger (excluding Istria I guess)?

>Also, when the Croats didn't feel like it anymore Yugoslavia broke apart.
t.croat

Sigh, you're just stating falsehoods, like claiming Trumbic was the Croatian president when there was no Croatia to be president of. He was the president of the Yugoslav council that signed the corfu declaration.

The only one that can be considered a Croatian president is, ironically, a Slovenian named Anton Korosec who was chosen at the National council in Zagreb as the president of the short lived and unrecognized state of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs that ultimately unified shortly after with the kingdom of Serbia forming the kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.

But Croats are not a gypsie people like the Serbs so they probably would have been able to keep their independence anyway. Also what kind of serb protection are you talking about Serbia got steamrolled by the central power and lost the war like they always do. If it wasn't for the great powers freeing them there probably wouldnt be a Serbia today.

Jews literally came to Israel from all over Europe, the Middle East, and the Americas and successfully adopted a language that had been dead for centuries, while fighting wars against all their neighbors, so don't give me any of that shit.

>Lot of slovakians didn't want to join the czehs
This is just a meme, they just did not liked idea of Czechoslovak nationality and wanted autonomy, not independence. People that actualy supported independence many times considered Slovaks Hungarian tribe, like Tuka.
>this should apply to the Hungarians and Russins too.
Try to win a war next time

>>this should apply to the Hungarians and Russins too.
>Try to win a war next time
What war? When did Czechoslovakia EVER win a war? In 1919 the Hungarian communist regained a lot of territories, the small slovak-hungarian war in ww2 was won by Hungary, besides that we were on the same side in WW1 and WW2.
Western forces made your artificial country, slovaks didn't fight for it, czehs barely did, you were never on the winning side, you just got lucky.
I am not denying that Czechoslovakia or Slovakia doesn't have the right to exist, but much like Ukraine, they gained a lot of territories that they had no right for, and always cried when someone bitch slapped them.

>b-but muh vienna award so unfair
When an outside force forced you to draw a new border (a lot more fair, as it was along the ethnic line)? Hmmm where did I hear that?

I can attest to this.

t. bong with family in Calabria

>Why was Yugoslavia a failure?
Because we didn't want it, it's that simple. Yugoslavia was formed out of need, to counter a foreign threat, once the threat was removed the incentive to stay in Yugoslavia was gone. You can't merge nations that don't want to be merged.

>You can't merge nations that don't want to be merged.
Which is why I voted for Brexit.

>When did Czechoslovakia EVER win a war
7 days war, war against you
>the small slovak-hungarian war in ww2 was won by Hungary
Interesting theory, also citation needed
> besides that we were on the same side in WW1 and WW2
WW1 is partialy ture, but you with G*rmans betrayed the Kaiser so we had to create the Legions
>WW2
literally what
>Western forces made your artificial country, slovaks didn't fight for it, czehs barely did, you were never on the winning side, you just got lucky.
Legions stopped CP POWs from comming to the West by controlling the Siberia and railways, this won Entete the war
>b-but muh vienna award so unfair
We got it back 7 years later, so what is your point

>7 days war, war against you
this war? which we won?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian–Czechoslovak_War

>Interesting theory, also citation needed
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovak–Hungarian_War

>literally what
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovak_Republic_(1939–1945)

>Legions stopped CP POWs from comming to the West by controlling the Siberia and railways, this won Entete the war
you kinda give too much credit for something fucking redundant
>We got it back 7 years later, so what is your point
Well, if you are a czech, then you lost it 26 years ago. If you are a slovak, then you now have a huge hungarian minority, which is only good for tensions.

Seriously, I can accept a romanian dragging about achievement. Even if they attacked without declaring war, a country which was in a civil war with a disarmed army, they did march in Budapest.

Czechoslovakians did jackshit, and they don't even exist anymore, both czech and slovaks agreed that their national identity is literally fake.

>7 days war
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Czechoslovak_War
>this war? which we won?
Can you provide a single source to back it up except for wikipedia page with zero citations that is the only language version that claims it was your victory?
That wiki page forgot a little bit about the Battle of Zvolen where general Šnajdárek destroyed your reserves which forced you fall back.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovak_Republic_(1939–1945)
My bad, i thought you talk about Czechoslovakia
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovak_Republic_(1939–1945)
Slovak state wasnt legitime
>you kinda give too much credit for something fucking redundant
Prove it isnt true
>which is only good for tensions.
real life isnt Hearts of Iron
>both czech and slovaks agreed that their national identity is literally fake.
You clearly know nothing about it

Atheists I suppose

Jesus fucking christ, I'm British, Hungarians are fucking scum, actual fucking scum, never heard a good word about htem, constantly claiming shit they had absolutely no right and have the fucking gall to lambast nations for having hungarian minorities

If we're the Villains of Europe you fucking horse niggers are the Villains of the Balkans, christ.

Yugoslavia was a Serbian idea, Pan-Slavism was a Russian idea used to justify Russian expansion into eastern and southern europe. Serbia wanted to "unite all Serbs into one state" to this end, they started Serbifying and colonizing Macedonia, they considered Croats to be Catholic Serbs and Bosniaks as being muslim Serbs, it was imperialism pure and simple, the Illyrian movement can be called a spiritual predecessor to the idea of Yugoslavia but Yugoslavia wasn't a pan-slavic state in reality, it was a Serbian dominated kingdom.

Hungarians are Anglos of Balkan

Hungary isn't in the Balkans, Serbs are the Anglos of the Balkans. Macedonians are the Irish, the Bulgarians are the Prussians of the Balkans, Greeks are the faggots of the Balkans.

>The differences amongst Italians and amongst Germans were/are greater than between Croats and Serbs.
not really

germans and italians were united even before they became countries, saying there were too many differences between them is revisionism

serbs and croats were always separate until yugoslavia

>germans and italians were united even before they became countries
wtf are you talking? they were different tribes and had a long stage of separate city states.

They functioned as a single country

all italians read and wrote in italian(florentine speech) from milano to palermo, they all considered themselves italians, etc. just because their leadership was divided among princes and merchants and bishops doesn't mean anything, the whole "your borders define your nation" mentality is modern(post ww2)

Florentine speech was imposed in 19 century after revolution. And doesnt became a thing even today.
They could consider themselves "Italians" as settlers of Italian peninsula. Same as current Europeans, Asians, Earthmen.

you're wrong

why are you arguing when you are ignorant on the subject?

nigger there's still a huge dialectal diversity in italy even today with people self identifying with their region/city first rather than their "italian" ethnicity.

You have any idea how hard it was to unite fucking Germans?

Even if we ignore differences in dialects - considering they were minimal- the average German cunt of the Medieval Period was big on "MUH RIIIIIGHTS." Cunts from component kingdoms to free cities were extremely anal about their independence and viewed any kind of centralized government with suspicion.

What wrong?
Italians and Germans appeared in 19 century. You can name citizens of Venice or Rome of 18 century as Italians as citizens of CURRENT TERRITORY OF ITALY, but they different states and different languages.

So what? The case is the same everywhere on earth.

Again, you're seing things from your modernist-marxist americanized point of view and not from the pre-ww2 general European point of view

>Italians and Germans appeared in 19 century
nope, they appeared in the middle ages

Martin Luther translated the bible in the GERMAN language in the 15th century

It was no a Russian idea, most proponents came from among Slavic nations living under Austrian rule. And Yugoslavia may have been ruled by a Serbian monarch but Alexander's goal was to create a unified Yugoslav nation. Many compromises were made to appease Slovenes and (especially) Croats so as not to give them the feeling the monarchy wasn't just a foreign entity.

>That's HRE, not Germany.
most incorrect sentence ive ever heard

>Again, you're seing things from your modernist-marxist americanized point of view and not from the pre-ww2 general European point of view

You're a fucking retard, you're the one that's viewing nations through the romantic lense of 19th century national romanticism. National identities did not exist, a high degree of state centralization allowed for the fabrication of national identities to be formed. The common school system eradicated regional dialects and customs in favor of a manufactured "standardized" language. Only a very small minority of italians was actually capable of speaking "proper" italian when the country was unified, for example.

you're still wrong

there are mountains of evidence that italians and germans considered themselves a nation(a folk, a people) before the 19th century

you're only spouting marxist revisionism

What language did Martin Luther translate the bible in? Mainzian? Swabian? No, German, he and all who read his bible called the language German and considered themselves German - "Deutsch"